| Literature DB >> 29062596 |
Sarah E Golding1, Claire Horsfield2, Annette Davies2, Bernadette Egan1, Martyn Jones3, Mary Raleigh2, Patricia Schofield4, Allison Squires5, Kath Start2, Tom Quinn6, Mark Cropley1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The study objective was to investigate and synthesize available evidence relating to the psychological health of Emergency Dispatch Centre (EDC) operatives, and to identify key stressors experienced by EDC operatives.Entities:
Keywords: Emergency call centres; Emergency disptach; Emotional stress; Job control; Psychological health; Psychological stress; Systematic review
Year: 2017 PMID: 29062596 PMCID: PMC5649589 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.3735
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ ISSN: 2167-8359 Impact factor: 2.984
Figure 1PRISMA flowchart.
Study characteristics—qualitative studies.
| Authors (year) | Research aim(s) | Theoretical approach | Method & data collector | Setting | Sample population | Recruitment strategy | Sample size | Inclusion/ Exclusion criteria | Analytic method |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Investigate lived experiences of EDs, with a focus on mental health and wellbeing | IPA | Face-to-face, or telephone, or Skype, semi-structured interviews; first author | Private offices (face-to-face interviews). EDs from three communications centres of one state-wide ambulance service, Australia | Ambulance EMDs | Recruited via email. After 1st nine interviews, participants strategically targeted by region, age & gender | None reported | IPA | ||
| Explore daily working experiences & how EDs manage stressors | No theoretical framework used. | Face-to-face, semi-structured interviews; first author | At worksite, in a quiet room. Single-site, ambulance EDC, South England | Ambulance EDC staff | Purposive sampling | None reported | Thematic analysis | ||
| Explore situations EDs find difficult & their reflections of how they manage them | Phenomemo logical- hermeneutic approach | Face-to-face Interviews; not reported | At work-site, in a private room. Single-site, EDC, Sweden | EDC operators | Voluntary with 100% recruitment | None reported | Phenomeno logical- hermenutic approach | ||
| (1) Assess nature & impact of critical incidents on health & wellbeing, (2) Examine attitudes towards support & explore barriers | No theoretical framework used | Face-to-face Interviews; not reported | Setting of interviews not reported. Large ambulance service dispatch centre, Ireland | EMTs & EDs at ambulance EDC | Volunteers following initial survey | None reported | Thematic analysis | ||
| Explore stressors faced by wildland fire fighting EDs & coping strategies use | Phenomenology | Face-to-face Interviews; author | Participants’ respective worksites. Multi-site, wildland fire fighter dispatch centre, USA | EDs working with wildland fire fighters | Recruited by phone & email invitation via a list provided by site co-ordinator | Inclusion criteria: at least one season of previous operational experience as a fire fighter | Phenomeno- logical | ||
| (1) Explore emotional labour expectations of police EDs, (2) Explore positive functions of emotional labour | Social construction of communication | Case study observation, interviews, & analysis of recorded phone calls; first author | Police EDC, in interview rooms. Single-site, Mid-western USA, mixed urban & rural | Police ED staff ( | Not reported | None reported | Open-coding technique | ||
| (1) Explore emotional experiences of police call takers, (2) Explore the institution’s emotion expression & feeling rules, (3) Explore communicative practices used to cope during & after calls | No theoretical framework used | Case study observation, semi-structured interviews, document analysis; not reported | Single-site Police call centre. Mid-West USA | Police call takers | Not reported | None reported | Constant comparative method |
Notes.
emergency dispatchers
emergency dispatch centre
emergency medical dispatchers
emergency medical technician
Interpretative Phemonenological Analysis
United States of America
Summary of findings—quantitative studies.
| Authors (year) | Cohort studies: sample size | Surveys: mode of delivery, sample size & response rate | Enough statistical power? | Outcome variable (measure) | Follow-up | Confounders controlled? | Results | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EDs | N/A | No | Perceived stress (PSS), job satisfaction (JS), perceived physical energy (13 item measure created by authors), coping style for acute stress (15 item measure created by authors), fitness testing (upper and lower body muscular strength) | Pre-post study | No control for possible confounders | All participants provided with 12-week membership to local fitness club & assigned personal performance coach. | The coping skills & fitness programme increased perceived physical energy & body strength, & reduced perceived stress, but had no effect on coping strategies or job satisfaction. | |
| N/A | 31 distributed, | No | State anxiety & trait anxiety (STAI) | None | No control for possible confounders | Male EDs had greater TA & SA than community norms. Female EDs had greater TA than community norms. Most-liked aspects (frequency-based questions): helping people, assisting officers, responding to telephone inquiries, excitement & adventure involved in radio work, variety on the job. Negative aspects (frequency-based questions): understaffing & overload, public disrespect & rudeness | Police EDs show elevated stress scores, but are not pathologically stressed. Police EDs report job satisfaction from the range of tasks they perform, but face organisational barriers that affect efficient working | |
| N/A | Distributed to 518 employees, 358 returned (69% response rate), postal | Yes | Common stressors identifier (42 item measure, developed by authors) | None | N/A | Four factor structure of common stressors identified (1) Organisational & managerial aspects; (2) New, unfamiliar & difficult duties/uncertainty; (3) Work overload; (4) Interpersonal relations | Key stressful situations include dealing with injured children, underuse of ability & potential, inadequate pay, managerial support & facilities at work. How ambulance staff are treated by other colleagues is an area of severe stress. | |
| N/A | Total number distributed not reported. | No | Social support (IQ), acute stress (ADSI) coping with effects of storm (WOC), effects of stress (IES), worst health symptom (health survey, author) general psychological distress (BSI GSI) | None | Completer analysis reported; no control for demographic or other confounders | Mean IES scores comparable to other disaster worker studies for Intrusion & for Avoidance. SS negatively associated with distress. EDs who were at work during storm were not more distressed at 2.5 mths than those who were at home. EDs who received CISD were higher in avoidance at 2.5 mths, but they also had higher estimated uninsured property losses & less social network involvement | Effects of storm on EDs were comparable to other disaster workers. CISD associated with higher avoidance, but cannot rule out effect of property damage. Social support deficits associated with greater distress | |
| N/A | Total distributed not reported. | Yes | Exposure to potentially traumatic events/calls (PTEM). Emotional distress related to worst duty-related event (PDI). PTSD symptoms over last 1 mth (PDS) | None | Demographic variables not checked or controlled for | Participants reported experiencing fear, helplessness or horror in reaction to 32% of different types of calls. Peri-traumatic distress: average score was 2.93, higher than comparator sample of police officers (1.3) & civilians (1.69) (comparator sample from Brunet et al., 2001). PTSD symptoms: 3.5% scored at or above 28 (cut-off for probable, current PTSD). Significant positive correlation between peri-traumatic distress & PTSD symptoms | Peri-traumatic distress was high & positively correlated with PTSD symptoms. Despite tele-communicators being physically distinct from traumatic scene, authors suggest they may not be buffered from development of PTSD symptoms | |
| N/A | Online survey. 120 surveys distributed. | No | Wellbeing (PWS), post-traumatic stress symptomatology (IES-R) & PTG (PTGI). Possible predictors self-efficacy (NGES), shift-work, being a trained ‘peer support officer’, giving & receiving SS (2-SSS) | None | Demographic variables not checked or controlled for | All EMDs reported high levels of self efficacy, total SS & the giving of SS. Self-efficacy, giving SS & receiving SS positively predicted psychological wellbeing across main sample ( | Self-efficacy & receiving SS positively associated with psychological wellbeing. Receiving SS also related to higher levels of PTG & lower levels of PTSD | |
| N/A | Total distributed not reported. | No | No. of verbally abusive calls, emotional exhaustion, health (GHQ), job-related strain & employee turnover intent (other measures not named). Perceived perpetrators of & perceived reasons for verbal abuse | None | Demographic variables not checked or controlled for | 7% of calls on average verbally abusive. Patients & emergency callers perceived as greater source of abuse than other professionals. ASCR staff perceived caller frustration & anxiety as most common cause of verbal abuse. Greater no. of abusive calls significantly positively correlated with levels of emotional exhaustion, depersonalisation & anxiety, but not depression & GHQ scores. Organisational commitment not significantly correlated with no. of calls, but significantly negatively correlated with all other outcomes | Call handlers reporting greater no. of abusive calls reported higher levels of emotional exhaustion, depersonalisation, & anxiety, but not depression & GHQ scores. Organisational commitment lower in those experiencing physical & psychological distress | |
| Total staff | N/A | Unclear | External work demands (counted no. of simultaneously active jobs handled by ED at time of sampling). HR, BP, anxiety & fatigue (VAS), ED perceptions of ALERT after implementation | Before & after study; approx. 4 mths after implementation of ALERT | Not reported | Improvements in performance with ALERT; ambulances arriving within 8 mins increased from 55.4% to 64.4%. No significant difference between HR & BP between paper based & computer based system, but increased workload demands associated with increase in BP in paper system only. Anxiety & fatigue increased with workload in both systems, but effect greater in paper system. EDs reported reduced stress levels & improvement in service performance using ALERT | Perceived stress reduced & service performance improved following implementation of ALERT | |
| EMDs | N/A | No | Salivary cortisol (sampled every 2hrs, from 9am to 7pm, across 1 day), subjective stress perception, attitude toward work (measures not named) | None | Not reported | Daytime cortisol secretion higher in EMDs than controls. Both groups: cortisol levels decreased towards end of day. Cortisol levels constantly higher in EMDs. Positive correlation between individual total cortisol levels & perceived emotional stress. Poor physical work environment positively associated with poor relationships with hierarchy | EMDs experience higher secretion of cortisol levels compared to lab staff on rest days |
Notes.
Acute Disaster Stress Index
ambulance service control room
approximately
blood pressure
Derogatis Brief Symptom Inventory Global Severity Index
Critical Incident Stress Debriefing
emergency dispatcher
General Health Questionnaire
heart rate
Impact of Events Scale
Impact of Events Scale-Revised
Incident Questionnaire
general job satisfaction measure
minutes
month
New General Efficacy Scale
number
Peri-traumatic Distress Inventory
Post-traumatic Diagnostic Scale
Perceived Stress Scale
Potentially Traumatic Events/calls Measure
post-traumatic growth
Post Traumatic Growth Inventory
post-traumatic stress disorder
Psychological Wellbeing Scale
state anxiety
social support
State-Trait Anxiety Inventory
trait anxiety
visual analogue scales
Ways of Coping Questionnaire
2-way Social Support Scale
Study assessments—qualitative studies.
| Authors (year) | Aims clearly stated? | Qualitative method appropriate? | Design appropriate to address aims? | Recruitment strategy appropriate? | Data collected so as to address research issue? | Relationship between researcher & participants adequately considered? | Ethical issues considered? | Data analysis sufficiently rigorous? | Findings clearly stated? | Overall quality rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Strong | |
| Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Strong | |
| Yes | Yes | Can’t Tell | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | No | Weak | |
| Yes | Yes | Yes | Can’t tell | Yes | No | Can’t tell | No | Yes | Moderate | |
| Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Can’t Tell | Yes | Moderate | |
| Yes | Yes | Yes | Can’t tell | Yes | No | Can’t tell | Yes | Yes | Moderate | |
| Yes | Yes | Yes | Can’t tell | Yes | Can’t tell | Can’t tell | Yes | Yes | Moderate |
Study assessments—quantitative studies.
| Authors (year) | Did study address a clearly focused issue? | Cohort/ sample recruited in an acceptable way? | Exposure accurately measured to minimise bias? | Outcome accurately measured to minimise bias? | Have authors identified important confounding factors? | Have authors accounted for confounding factors in design and/or analysis? | Was follow up of participants long enough? | Do you believe the results? | Can results be more widely applied? | Overall quality rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | Yes | Can’t tell | Yes | No | No | Can’t tell | Can’t tell | Can’t tell | Weak | |
| Yes | Yes | N/A | No | N/A | N/A | N/A | No | No | Weak | |
| Yes | Yes | N/A | Can’t tell | N/A | N/A | N/A | Can’t tell | Can’t tell | Weak | |
| Yes | Can’t tell | N/A | Yes | N/A | N/A | N/A | Yes | Can’t tell | Moderate | |
| Yes | Yes | N/A | Yes | N/A | N/A | N/A | Yes | Yes | Strong | |
| Yes | Yes | N/A | Yes | N/A | N/A | N/A | Can’t tell | Can’t tell | Moderate | |
| Yes | Can’t tell | N/A | Can’t tell | N/A | N/A | N/A | Yes | Can’t tell | Weak | |
| Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Can’t tell | Can’t tell | Can’t tell | Yes | Yes | Moderate | |
| Yes | Can’t tell | Can’t tell | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | Can’t tell | Weak |
Summary of findings—qualitative studies.
| Authors (year) | Key themes | Summary of key findings |
|---|---|---|
| (1) Operational stress and vicarious trauma, (2) Organizational stress, (3) Post traumatic growth | Dispatchers experience vicarious trauma, which can impact their mental health and relationships with others. Organizational protocols contribute to stress, & lack of positive feedback leaves dispatchers feeling undervalued. Some dispatchers experience post-traumatic growth. | |
| (1) How dispatch is perceived by others, (2) What dispatch really involves, (3) Dealing with the stresses of dispatch | Dispatchers enjoy & take pride in work, despite stressors. Demoralisation reported. Three key stressors: resources & pay, interpersonal difficulties, & feeling overworked & undervalued. | |
| (1) Uncertainty, (2) Communication difficulties, (3) Internal & external resources, (4) Personal qualities, (5) Acquired skills | Stressors reported include: clinical uncertainty & lack of information, communication difficulties & lack of resources. Dispatchers drew on personal attributes, experience & knowledge to manage difficult calls. | |
| (1) The nature of the critical incident(s), (2) The impact of the critical incident(s), (3) Organisational hassles, (4) The perceived effectiveness of peer support, (5) EMCs—the ‘forgotten few’? | Some critical incidents are more traumatic than others, & have more significant impact on mental health. Cumulative effect of several critical incidents occurring within a short time reported. | |
| (1) Stressors, (2) Coping | Themes of control & the need for emotional support to cope. Elements of organizational operations & how they contribute to worker stress were present & underscore the importance of smooth operations & supportive management in high stress jobs. | |
| (1) Emotional labour as comic relief, (2) Emotional labour as ‘fix’, (3) Emotional labour as altruistic service | Emotional labour is an important aspect of the ‘structuation of organisational reality’. Healthy, positive workplaces are fostered through shared emotional labour. | |
| (1) Channelling citizens’ emotion, (2) Expressed emotions of call takers, (3) Institutional feeling rules, (4) Emotion labour strategies | Call taking not considered stressful of itself. Peer-support helps reduce stress. Advantage of telephone versus face to face exchanges where emotional demand high. Organisational culture influences emotional expression. |
Study characteristics—quantitative studies.
| Authors (year) | Research aim(s) | Setting, role, region & country | Gender & Age (yrs) | Ethnicity | Education | Av. exp. (yrs) | Recruitment methods | Inclusion/Exclusion criteria | Is sample deemed representative of population? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Determine effects of 10-week coping skills & fitness training programme on changes in perceived stress, job satisfaction, and perceived energy. | Police dispatch centre. Medium-sized city, South Eastern USA. | 89% female; | NR | NR | 8 | Volunteers recruited after oral presentation about the study | Full-time ED | No check on representativeness reported | |
| Examine levels of stress in police dispatchers in a municipal law enforcement agency | Police dispatch centre (21 dispatchers, five supervisors, five community service officers). Urban, Tallahassee, Florida, USA | NR; NR | NR | NR | NR | Study materials distributed at start of each shift | Total cohort | No check on representativeness reported | |
| Identify types of situation typically identified as stressful by ambulance service staff | Devon Ambulance Service; ambulance crew, officers & control room staff. Urban & rural South West UK | NR; NR | NR | NR | NR | Survey posted to all employees | Total cohort | Total cohort sample, no check on representativeness reported | |
| Examine relationships between acute disaster stress, coping, social support networks & physical, psychological stress in emergency dispatchers following exposure to a hurricane | Dade County Communications Centre (fire & ambulance dispatch), South Florida, USA | 93% female; | 7% African American, 62% Caucasian, 24% Hispanic, 6% Native American | 35% high school, 33% technical/ college education | 12 | Volunteers from two out of three shifts; not total cohort | NR | No check on representativeness reported, but no participants from one shift | |
| Explore work-related trauma exposure, peri-traumatic distress & PTSD symptomatology | Police tele-communicators, 24 states, Midwestern & Southwestern USA | 74% female; | 77% Caucasian | 81% min. college education or vocational training | 12 | Convenience sample recruited via letters, adverts to professional associations, online forums, social media outlets | Inclusion: at least part-time work in the last year as a tele-communicator. No exclusion criteria applied | No check on representativeness reported | |
| Investigate the impact of self-efficacy, giving & receiving social support on psychological well-being, post-traumatic growth & symptoms of PTSD | EMDs, three different regions across Queensland, Australia | 68% female; | NR | NR | NR | Managers of communication centres sent group emails to all employees | Only inclusion criteria: employed as EMD | No check on representativeness reported | |
| Investigate prevalence, perceived causes of verbally abusive calls, & relationship to psychological wellbeing. | NHS ASCR, UK, region not reported | 81% female; | 98% Caucasian, 2% Other | NR | NR | Recruited from ASCR, but further details not reported | NR | Can’t tell as recruitment methods not clear. | |
| Evaluate the psychophysiological impact of new computerised ‘ALERT’ control system by comparing job performance & stress before & after implementation | Ambulance control room. Urban, Manchester, UK | 90% female; | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | Can’t tell as recruitment methods not clear. | |
| Establish diurnal salivary cortisol levels in EMD centre. | EMD Centre. Urban, Metz, France | 88% female; | NR | Reported as variable | 4 | NR | Inclusion (EMD group): working in ED >1 yr; working on same rotation; participation on shift following rest period of 7 days. Inclusion (control group, not EMD staff): lab staff on rest days. Exclusion (all): Not on any medication, good general health, no history of psychiatric illness. | Can’t tell as recruitment methods not clear & sample size of 8 in each group. |
Notes.
ambulance service control room
average experience
emergency dispatch
emergency medical dispatchers
mean
National Health Service
not reported
post-traumatic stress disorder
range
United Kingdom
United States of America